The practice of signaling between living organisms is believed to be as old as the existence of life itself. Humans constantly perform activities which intentionally generate some form of stimulus capable of reception by at least one of the five human sensory capabilities (sight, sound, touch, smell and taste) to signal or convey information to others. The most common of these involve some form of visual or aural information, with tactile (touch-based) signaling methods less common and the intentional use of smell or taste-based methods used infrequently. Most common signaling or communication activities may be described as “broadcast” methods where reception of visual or aural information is meant for general reception and not exclusively confined to a particular recipient, rather than “person-to-person” method of communication specifically directed toward, and reception-limited to, one or more specific recipients. Whether a verbal communication is overheard by a party for which the communication was not intended, or a visual signal flashed to a passing motorist is also inadvertently observed by a nearby law enforcement officer, broadcast methods of signaling may often result in confusing situations when unintended parties mistake communications directed toward others as having been meant for them.
Such broadcast signaling methods are often desirable, including but limited to screaming “FIRE!” in a crowded theater in the event of an actual fire, and are generally easy to perform. Establishing a reliable and exclusive point-to-point signaling link with one intended recipient may be problematic or even impossible under some circumstances. Establishing a reliable and exclusive point-to-point communication or signaling link from one originator to a multiple of intended recipients is almost always a more difficult undertaking. The ability to differentiate between desired and undesired recipients by either enabling reception by only those desired, disabling reception by those undesired, or some combination of the two is highly dependent upon a number of factors, including but not limited to the number of persons in each group and their identities, their physical proximities to the originator, any limitation(s) or restrictions on their ability to sense the particular stimuli of the signal, the nature of the signal, and the like. The inability of prior art signaling methods to reliably convey the desired information without creating the possibility of confusion or misunderstandings as to who the intended recipient(s) may be is a problem remaining to be solved thousands of years into the human experience.
As one modern non-limiting example of a situation in which confusion is prevalent when conventional aural broadcast signaling is utilized, consider the circumstances in many types of sporting activities. The use of a common signaling whistle by referees or other game administrators is ubiquitous in many sports, including but not limited to football, basketball, soccer, and others. The piercing sound of the whistle is intentionally created for its ability to project for considerable distances and to be heard in the presence of considerable background noise and sports equipment which may impair the hearing of players. Further, it is critical that the sound be unquestionably and immediately detected by all game participants while their attention is focused entirely on the game and they are not specifically devoting great effort to actively listen for whistles. In a professional or semi-professional game situation, only one principal activity is typically occurring at any one time. Although there is usually more than one referee or game administrator, the sound of any whistle signal will be readily interpreted to pertain to that single activity and the players will be easily able to ascertain that the signal was intended for them. However, when there is more than one activity occurring in close proximity as is usually the case during training or practice periods, the sounds of whistles from coaches and trainers supervising separate activities usually bleed from one activity area to adjacent areas due to the inability to effectively limit the range of the sound. See, for example, the arrangement of multiple soccer fields in very close proximity depicted in FIG. 1. To some extent, problems attributable to such arrangements may be overcome by the use of whistles tuned to slightly different tones, but in doing so, a certain amount of subliminal processing by the intended recipients will still be required to ascertain if the signal was intended for them or is an errant signal meant for others and the results will not be wholly satisfactory.
It is expected that highly skilled and practiced players would be able to adapt to these limitations, particularly since their activities are usually conducted in areas with adequate space between potentially conflicting signaling regions. However, in other facets of sports, and particularly in youth sports activities where the participants are neither highly skilled nor practiced, it is very common for a number of games or practice sessions to be conducted in close proximity to each other. For example, a typical football field found at most high schools is approximately 360 feet long by 160 feet wide. Fields for youth soccer may vary in size from as small as 60 feet by 90 feet, leading to the possibility that a large number of youth soccer fields may be overlaid onto the area occupied by a single high school football field. One example of how youth soccer fields may be established in close proximity to each other is provided as FIG. 1. With simultaneous games or practice occurring on adjacent fields, it is highly confusing at best, and impossible at the worst, for young players to be able to distinguish the sound of the whistle of their referee(s) from those of the referee(s) on adjacent fields. The referees' potential inability to effectively control the games and the participants' inability to play the game enjoyably represents a considerable obstacle to the proper conduct of these games. Further, any errant whistle sounds from unauthorized sources with malicious intent only further degrade the game or training experience for the participants, coaches, and spectators.
What is needed is a solution to the problem of providing broadcast-type signals from authorized game or training personnel that are received only by authorized participants of the game or other activity under their purview and not by any unintended recipients, thereby differentiating between the two. Further, such solution must be capable of operating in an environment where multiple instances are simultaneously deployed without adverse interaction. Preferably, this solution will also permit a single signal broadcast by the originator to provide multiple stimuli to the intended recipients to enhance their ability to receive the signals using one or more of their aural, visual, and tactile senses. This feature would effectively overcome any physical disabilities or other limitations of some participants, providing an equivalent experience for all. Further, the physical implementation of specific embodiments should comprise a form familiar to the users so that no additional skills or period of adaptation is required to transition from prior art systems to those taught herein.
As another modern non-limiting example of a situation in which confusion is prevalent consider the circumstances in training or guiding animals for distinct activities like shows, guide animal training, obedience, or hunting. The use of a common signaling whistle limits the number of activities due to the limitations of an aural broadcast with a limited set of commands by one trainer or handler. The piercing sound of the whistle is intentionally created for its ability to project for considerable distances and to be heard in the presence of considerable background noise as well as other sensory input. Further, it is critical that the sound be unquestionably and immediately detected by all participants while their attention is focused entirely on the activity at hand to overcome any distraction due to other animals, or different visual, aural, and olfactory sensations. They are not specifically devoting great effort to actively listen for whistles. In a situation where a single, highly trained animal is involved, only one principal activity is typically occurring at any one time and the set of activities may be limited. In the case of animals, they have limited ability to cognitively differentiate where the signal is coming from and if it is meant for them. This often means that the communication with those animals is tightly limited by the required space to clearly differentiate where the signal originates.
It is expected that in competitions or in live events where a highly trained and/or experienced animal is participating that it would be able to adapt to these limitations, particularly since their activities are usually conducted in areas with adequate space between potentially conflicting signaling regions and their set of possible commands are limited. However, in other facets of animal events, and particularly in animal training activities where the participants are neither highly skilled nor practiced, it could be common for a number of training sessions to be conducted in close proximity to each other. For example, a typical training field may be approximately 80 feet long by 120 feet wide. Different types of training fields may vary in size from as small as 30 feet by 30 feet, leading to the possibility that a large number of training activities may be overlaid onto the area occupied by a single training field or public park. Other activities may be conducted within the same general area by participants not confined to any set boundaries as is common in team sports. For example, numerous animal trainers and their animals may be interspersed within a single confined area. In these situations, signaling confusion between the various handlers and their animals may render the area unusable for any significant training purposes.
Another situation in which confusion of audio signals may exist is on factory floors. Present communication methods between small groups of employees include phones, walkie-talkies, or general public address (PA) system broadcasts via speakers to a wide area. Many complex systems of automation today that run the same products consistently have minimal human interaction for monitoring and communication and instead have sensors and automatic process change devices to handle any process contingency in a very efficient manner. However, when a new process is being set up or a line has a lot of variability, full automation is not always possible. In those cases the workers need to be able to communicate clearly and quickly in order to keep the line moving efficiently while maintaining appropriate safety processes.
It is expected that an existing highly optimized production line that has been well-established has minimal need for any worker input or discussion. However, in new lines or lines with a lot of variability, there will be a need for more human communication and concise interaction to maintain the process flow and to adapt to unforeseen events for which a paper plan did not account such as in gaming when setting up a temporary line for a new product in a pilot run. There will be time studies and some preliminary automation in the form of rollers, belts, emergency stops, and possibly some optics but mostly, workers will be controlling the product flow manually with walkie-talkies and hand signals or gestures. There will be situations for safety issues, calls for assistance, or on the fly enhancements to the process. These lines are often in close proximity to other pilot lines or near an actual established production line and the current process is usually that people manually stop lines and then there is a discussion about why the line stopped, what is going on, or other extraneous conversation just getting to the intent of the vague communication.
What is needed is a solution to the problem of providing broadcast-type signals from an authorized source to communicate with intended recipients while simultaneously preventing any accidental reception by, and subsequent confusion for, any unintended recipients. Apparatuses and systems capable of differentiating between intended and unintended recipients would be a novel and useful solution to the existing problems. Further, such solution must be capable of operating in an environment where multiple instances are simultaneously deployed without adverse interaction. Preferably, this solution will also permit a single signal broadcast by the originator to provide multiple stimuli to the intended recipients to enhance their ability to receive the signals using one of more of their aural, visual, and tactile senses. This feature would effectively overcome any physical disabilities or other limitations of some participants including language, providing an equivalent experience for all. Further, the physical implementation of specific embodiments should comprise a form familiar to the users and be easily configurable so that no additional skills or appreciable period of adaptation is required to transition from prior art systems to those taught herein.